Tragically and unnecessarily, millions are turning their backs on organized religion altogether because of what I call “the supernatural terrorist fallacy”–the idea that God is an actual, unnatural Supreme Being with a human-like personality, and that the Bible accurately reflects God’s thoughts, words, and deeds. Ironically, such a literal reading of sacred scripture may be the single greatest factor fueling the epidemic of atheism sweeping America today.

The supernatural terrorist fallacy is the false belief that writings thousands of years old reveal God’s unchanging character. As the new atheists are all too happy to point out, if this is true then God must be considered the ultimate terrorist. As Michael Earl painfully details in his “Bible Stories Your Parents Never Taught You” and “The Ultimate Terrorist” audio programs, in passage after passage in the Hebrew scriptures, in the early Christian scriptures, and in the Qur’an, God is said to employ the calculated use of violence or the threat of violence to inculcate fear, intended to coerce or intimate…, which is how the U.S. Department of Defense defines terrorism. We all know this is not true, of course. God is NOT a cosmic terrorist. But because many passages in scripture clearly portray God in just such an unflattering light, I predict that the rising tide of atheism will continue unabated so long as we religious folk trivialize God by interpreting our religious texts literally.

When we read about “supernatural” utterances or acts in the Bible, we should always remember to apply the evening news test.

The Evening News Test

Whenever any story, any culture, or any scriptural passage claims “God said this” or “God did that,” what follows is necessarily what some person or group of people felt or thought or wished or wanted God to say or do, often as justification after the fact. These subjectively meaningful claims are never objective, measurable reality. In other words, had CNN been there to record the moment of revelation, there would have been nothing out of the ordinary (nothing miraculous) to show on the evening news–nothing other than what was coming out of someone’s mouth, or pen, or whatever folks wrote with back then. If we fail to understand this, we belittle God and will surely miss what God is revealing and doing today. And we mock God if we argue that He communicated more clearly to goat herders and fisherman in the distant past, through dreams and intuitions, than He does today through measurable, cumulative evidence.

Is this Really the Gospel–God’s ‘Great News’?

What underlies the supernatural terrorist fallacy is the failure to recognize that the so-called supernatural language in scripture is actually pre-natural (before we could have possibly had a natural, factual understanding) and unnatural (in the same way that what we do in our dreams, if interpreted literally, is unnatural).

Think about it . . . An unnatural father who occasionally engages in unnatural acts (supernatural interventions) sent his unnatural son to the world in an unnatural way, offering an unnatural salvation from an unnatural curse brought about by an unnatural snake. Those who believe in all this unnatural activity get to enjoy an unnatural heaven and everyone else will suffer an unnatural hell, forever.

Is it any wonder that young people are leaving religion by the millions, if this is the “good news” they are offered? Is it any wonder that the new atheists continue to ride bestseller lists if religion is equated with such “supernaturalism”?

As religious people the world over know in their hearts, God is infinitely more REAL than the above absurd characterization. But without a sacred deep time worldview we’ll lack the eyes to see and ears to hear how glorious the good news actually is–that is, in a this-world realistic way. And. of course, we’ll continue to be publicly (and rightfully!) mocked by the new atheists.

49 Responses

I think, personally, that a good part of the problem is reading the Bible out of historical context. Many things that are considered highly reactionary in this day and age (e.g. how the Apostle Paul instructs women to be treated, the Mosaic laws concerning the treatment of slaves, even the metaphors in use) were highly revolutionary and forward-looking in their day (e.g. “an eye for an eye” being a major improvement over “torture to death for a trivial trespass”, and the view of women as chattel property of their father, then husband – for LIFE!) For years I had problems with being “a slave to Christ” – but then I realized this wasn’t a literal directive, rather it is an attempt to explain something in terms that folks of the day could comprehend.

Maybe the greatest disservice that was done to the Christian (also Muslim) religion was that the sacred text was ‘frozen’ – somehow, it seems so *wrong* that God simply shurgged His shoulders and walked off some thousand years ago, after being very involved in the lives of His people before that. Sounds more like a child that loses interest in a favorite toy than a Supreme Being, to me.

I’ve long felt that while the advent of the printing press was largely responsible for spreadig Christianity far and wide, it did so at the expense of the text’s continued development and societal relevance. Fixing a set of exact words on a page is great for historical documentation, but not so great for a “words to live by” document that will bind all future generations.

I know that some contributors here will bristle at the idea of the Bible being better off un-fixed and handed down orally like other ancient myths and histories. I anticipate hearing the well-worn meme about how some people pick and choose only the parts of scripture that they like, but that characterization is itself shallow and intellectually lazy.

Why should critical thought, using one’s God-given mental gifts, be considered a sin against God? What exactly is superior about fastidiously following a detailed set of rules, without regard for the social climate in which those rules were set down–or more importantly, without careful consideration of the reasons that various rules were put in place? What just and loving God would set up his creations to fail, by allowing the world to change so drastically while leaving such rules (and the dire punishments for breaking them) in place?

Very interesting post, Rev. Matt . . . I had not heard of Rev. Dowd, but the dichotomy of science and religion is a long-standing source of (contrived, IMHO) divisiveness that I would love to see fall by the wayside.

Rev. Matt, do you ever get tired of constantly attacking Christianity and the Bible? Do you feel that you have any balance at all? It seems that this is your primary topic of the vast majority of your blog threads. I can’t imagine why Christians react with hostility sometimes.

First, you’ll have to address your questions to Rev. Dowd. This post is his. He is reading and will respond. By the way, he is an ordained Christian minister in the United Church of Christ.

If you’ll take the time to read Rev. Dowd’s post and other materials in more depth, you’ll see that he does not attack nor reject the Bible or Christianity (nor do I). He does reject a rigid literal interpretation of any scripture of any religious tradition (as do I). Why don’t you start out by engaging him on that issue….

Most revealed religion requires adherents to believe things that go against nature. Such as a mortal “becoming” God, or the concept of virginity both before and after giving birth. Look to the most basic tenets that require suspension of reason for belief, therein lay the culprit. The other thing driving people away from revealed religion is the ease and frequency with which leaders of such religions abuse their power (Hagee) or make ridiculous claims (Falwell).

Not only am I not attacking Christianity, I’m a devoutly committed Evolutionary Christian. Indeed, one of my latest blog posts on my TGFE site is titled, “How and Why I’m a Pentecostal Evangelical”: http://thankgodforevolution.com/node/1634

You are a liar bound for hell unless you repent – you and all your ungodly pagan heathen abominable frauds who call themselves christians but in actuality are servants of satan, that father of all lies, that murderer, that roaring lion who seeks whom he may devour. You will be separated from Almighty God for all eternity in the lake of fire you false teacher; you are a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a hopelessly lost wicked sinner who thinks that his righteousness is going to save him from eternal torment. God the Father sent His only begotten Son to pay the penalty for the sins you and I commit, and if you continue to trample on the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ that He shed for the sins of the entire world then you will have no hope in this world of ever being saved. You are worshipping satan with all of your heart, and you know it! Repent before you die, all of you godless atheists who in actuality will be tormented in the lake of fire because that is what you are choosing to do.

YOU and all your unbelieving vipers are going to hell unless you repent.

I am a deep time kind of guy, too, but I am uncomfortable with the claim that some scientific consensus du jour is “reality”. The scientific consensus of 1973 was that an impending ice age would destroy civilization.

The claim that integrity is interchangeable with Christ is at odds with the dictionary. Mirriam Webster’s definition is ” firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values”. God is the wellspring of truth, but by Dowd’s definition, a committed atheist would somehow be spiritual. Claptrap.

Mr Dowd, I think it’s great that you are helping to “bridge the gap” for believers and agnostics/athiests alike. I am always quick to point out to anyone that I believe that Science is an explaination of how God makes things work. That statement will usually get anyone thinking on the matter.

I am a bit concerned though that by telling people to not take a literal meaning to the bible, that many of the great basic messages and life lessons can be lost. Although I do understand your intentions, take for example the Gospels. They do not all tell the same story the same way, but the author’s literations were written for a purpose. I do hope and pray that in your writings and your travels that you do not minimize the importance of the Bible’s content. I’ve known a man to study for a lifetime on the book of Daniel alone. I am just concerned that by telling a young generation of Christians to not take “every little part” of the bible literally, that you could turn those people away from wishing to obtain a more in depth knowledge of the messages contained within the bible. Most of my Christian friends have their favorite part of The Bible. I myself am a great fan of The Apostle Paul’s life and his letters, especially the letters to Corinth. That is soemthing that I would hate to see go by the wayside. Just my thought….Keep up the good work!

I am not discouraging people from cherishing the Bible. I do. Truly! I’ve read it twice straight through and a third time over the course of a year.

What I AM trying to do is help people see that God didn’t stop revealing truth vital to human wellbeing back when people believed the world was flat and religious insights were recorded on animal skins. God is still communicating faithfully today, publicly, through the worldwide, self-correcting scientific enterprise. FACTS ARE GOD’S NATIVE TONGUE.

Realizing this, now when I become aware of new fossil discovery or see a new Hubble image, or when I hear that we are made of stardust, I don’t think to myself, “Oh no, this doesn’t fit with Genesis.” I think, “Wow, look at what God is revealing today! Look how God created us! Isn’t this awesome?!!”

@TunsUvFun – I would contend that, by taking the stories in the Bible literally, one may very well lose sight of those “basic messages and life lessons” you mention. For example, the whole Garden of Eden thing – if taken literally, it seems extremely “unnatural”. However, reading it metaphorically, there are *lots* of things you can learn from it.

Besides, if I take it literally, either I can’t eat shrimp, lobster, and shellfish – or else it’s OK to do so. Which can get really confusing. And, don’t even get me started on where it says to take our children and smash their heads against the rocks.

One need spend only a little time in a library or online to discover that the world’s ancient religious texts are full of so-called supernatural tales. There are hundreds if not thousands of stories, on every continent and within every tradition, of animals talking, of gods and goddesses profoundly affecting the lives of ordinary humans and the course of human history, of stars making one-time appearances and heralding world-changing events, of heroes accomplishing superhuman feats, of individuals living for hundreds of years, of angels encouraging and devils tempting, and of the blind seeing, the lame walking, and the demonically possessed made whole. There are stories of virgin births, resurrections from the dead, ascensions into heaven.

One may choose to believe or disbelieve any of these stories. However, that they exist is beyond argument. For example, as I list in my book, I was able to find 27 stories of virgin births in the ancient world that predated the story of Jesus’ birth (see Appendix A of by book, Thank God for Evolution).

3. Supernatural stories are, in fact, pre-natural, and they understandably mirror the meaningful and seemingly supernatural or miraculous experiences we all have every night in our dreams.

Through evolutionary psychology and evolutionary neuroscience God has revealed to us why human beings will inevitably and freely use dream-like (supposedly ‘supernatural’) language in the process of personifying or relationalizing natural forces and dynamics.

How was the world made? Why do earthquakes, tornados, and other bad things happen? Why must we die? Why do we struggle with inner feelings and impulses that tempt us to act in ways detrimental to ourselves and our loved ones? And why have other cultures answered these same questions in different ways? These and other big questions cannot be answered by the powers of human perception alone. Yet answer them we must. Thus, long before modern science could be recruited to the task, ancient cultures gave useful and inspiring answers – answers that now compel literalistic forms of religions to engage in endless battles with the scientific worldview. The way forward is to recognize that prior to advances in technology and scientific ways of testing truth claims, factual answers were simply unavailable. It wasn’t just difficult to have a natural, factual understanding of infection before microscopes brought bacteria into focus; it was impossible. Similarly, it was impossible to understand the large-scale structure of the Universe before telescopes allowed us to see galaxies. Thus, traditional answers to life’s biggest questions are not really supernatural; they are pre-natural.

So in answer to your question: No, I have no problem with replacing “un” with “super” in the paragraph in my post. I just praise God for a natural faith! THAT’S where I find my greatest inspiration to follow Jesus and live a victorious Christ-like life.

My two cents – Rev. Dowd and his wife Connie are living incredible lives traveling around the world preaching this message. If only more of us could find in ourselves this kind of personal dedication to seeking knowledge and inspiring others. I’m only a few pages into his book, (and thank you very much for signing it, Michael) but cannot wait to finish it.

Michael, Isn’t it possible that a fourth option that our “stories” of supernatural occurrences could be true as well as some of “their” stories also? I’m always suspicious when people try to limit “Possible” explanations. I’m also curious as to your use of “pre-natural” as in your dismissal of the supernatural with, “Thus, traditional answers to life’s biggest questions are not really supernatural; they are pre-natural.”

As I’m sure you can tell, I’m meaning more than the Webster definition of integrity. By integrity, I mean BEING RIGHT WITH GOD – that is, being in right relationship Reality at all nested levels, from the personal to the planetary – honoring the past and being a blessing to the future. I would argue that, at this time in history, integrity is everything. It’s now the only thing that truly matters.

With integrity, things work – heaven is ours. Without it, things don’t work – hell inevitably follows. This is as true for institutions, nations, and humanity as a whole as it is for individuals and families. Conversations about integrity matter. Talking about almost anything else is a distraction.

The fact is that we’re ALL out of integrity – not just because we have instincts that sometimes lead us to do thing we feel guilty about but also because we’re part of larger systems that are themselves out of integrity and which make it difficult for individuals to go against the grain. This is simply what’s so. At this time in history, it couldn’t be any other way.

Those who think they can abide ‘in Christ’ without growing ‘in integrity’ mock God; they are deceived. And while it’s possible to live in integrity in a post-modern world without an evolutionary worldview, it’s much, MUCH easier with a deep-time understanding of grace.

After all, what is repenting and getting right with God other than waking up in to our pig-pen existence and coming home to Integrity? What is abiding in Christ other than living in integrity? What is the fruit of the Holy Spirit other than evidence of integrity?

Those who think that salvation can be divorced from integrity are to be pitied above all others. Sure, it may be wonderful to imagine a blissful existence after we die. I’m not denying that after we die we go to the same place (with God) that we were before we were born.

But if we want to know heaven in THIS life, if we want the peace the passes all understanding on THIS side of death, there really IS only one way: Integrity. Those who think there’s some other way belittle the gospel and are out of touch with reality.

The two types of religious people that Jesus was most critical of were the Sadducees and Pharisees – those who thought being right with God meant being in the right tradition, having the right beliefs, or doing the right rituals. To both of these Jesus emphatically said, “No, that’s not it. Follow me. Walk the path I’m walking. Abide in integrity. It’s by your fruit that you’ll be known.” When we forget this we betray God.

CORRECTION: Matt, in your comment you mention that I am an ordained United Church of Christ minister. It is true that I was originally ordained in the UCC and pastored three UCC churches. But I not longer have fellowship with the United Church of Christ, largely because in the late 1980s and early 1990s I merely “believed” in original sin without KNOWING the nature of my instincts. See here for why I was (rightly!) disfellowshipped: A Personal Message to United Church of Christ Clergy

An easy rule of thumb for discerning (at least at the personal level) whether one is in or out of integrity is simply to ask oneself the following question:

Am I carrying any resentments or secrets, and do I have any unfinished business? When we let go of our resentments, confess our secrets (to those for whom it matters), and clean up unfinished business, we naturally and inevitably grow in integrity – that is, we grow in humility, authenticity, responsibility, and service. And then we KNOW heaven no matter what other compost we may need to deal with.

Rev. Dowd – one more thing in favor of your viewpoints regarding “supernatural” events/beliefs is that it also ties in ancient beliefs with what we see today. Just as common diseases looked like the work of God (or the Devil) to our ancestors, certain conditions today (from things like fibromyalgia to some forms of mental illness) seem “unnatural” – though, in our supposedly enlightened state, we simply shrug these off as self-delusional conditions, or maybe an excuse to avoid taking responsibility. The fact is that there is a lot we still don’t know about how the universe (and everything in it) works. To us, that stuff seems every bit as “supernatural” today as the Nike turning red did back in Moses’ day.

My only comment: If the Bible is just the perceptions of ignorant desert herders and mystics what is it that we should base our understanding of a God on? Wouldn’t anything we feel, hear, or assume be just as valid…hell, more valid than the vague stories from this ancient book? When we don’t rely on our natural BS meter, based in logic and reason, we fall victim to many insane and ridiculous beliefs. I believe this article represents the modern effort to reinvent a religion; to make it more marketable to young targets who are currently not the victims of a government sponsored anti-scientific education unlike our parents and grandparents. Remember that it took the Russians launching Sputnik in the 1950s for the US to realize that teaching real science in school was utterly important. It wasn’t until 1960 that evolution was even mentioned in textbooks. The point here is that students are taught that our universe is governed by scientific laws that are discoverable, observable and testable. We have yet to confirm the existence of the supernatural but have many times discovered natural explanations for supernatural claims. Rev. Tittle is wise to recognize that taking the super- out of a supernatural god is a good way to get young people to not roll their eyes at the mention of God. But if he is right, what is the point of worshipping? If the Bible is subjective, most probably full of misconceptions and errors, and antidotal, isn’t it just a historical fiction worthy of awe on par with Beowulf or the Odyssey?

EdT. I’m pretty sure you meant “NILE” when my Nike’s turn red it is usually from that fire ant killer they put on the fields. Most physicists will tell you that there numerous “natural” events which quantuum physics can’t explain. To me, this would be “PreNatural” using Michael’s apparent definition. The existence of supernaturally explain non supernatural events doesn’t necessarily prove that the supernatural doesn’t exist. that would be akin to me stating that since Matt explained wrongly that Michael is an ordained Christian minister that there are NO ordained Christian ministers. That would be extremely unscientific logically wouldn’t it?

You are a liar bound for hell unless you repent – you and all your ungodly pagan heathen abominable frauds who call themselves (muslims) but in actuality are servants of satan, that father of all lies, that murderer, that roaring lion who seeks whom he may devour. You will be separated from Almighty (Allah) for all eternity in the lake of fire you false teacher; you are a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a hopelessly lost wicked sinner who thinks that his righteousness is going to save him from eternal torment. (Allah) the Father sent His(prophet, Muhammad) and if you continue to trample (on the name of Allah)then you will have no hope in this world of ever being saved. You are worshipping satan with all of your heart, and you know it! Repent before you die, all of you godless atheists who in actuality will be tormented in the lake of fire because that is what you are choosing to do.

YOU and all your unbelieving vipers are going to hell unless you repent.

-slightly amended from “Saved by the blood of Jesus” above. Thanks for the material.

Scott, I honestly have no idea what you’re trying to communicate with your latest comment, but in response to your first one…

Religions are ALWAYS reinventing themselves. That the nature of the evolution of consciousness.

And scripture is always and ONLY scripture for those who say it is. That’s why one person’s or group’s scripture is another’s irrelevant myth.

Not long after writing emerged, the Bible came to be. For many in the land of Moses and for centuries thereafter, it would have seemed a miracle to watch someone coax words from scratches on clay tablets or from strange symbols on papyrus or animal skins. What words would have been called forth on those occasions? Such pronouncements would surely have included what we now call Holy Scripture, or what Jesus’ ancestors called the Torah, the first five books of the Bible. For the Hebrew people, interpretations of the Word, even written interpretations that would become the Talmud, would be subject to question, debate, and revision – while the Word itself stood firm. It is thus no wonder that, for Christians, tradition places great significance on scripture as the written Word.

A much broader understanding of scripture is now emerging, however. It includes awareness that interpretations of the Holy Word should not be tethered to the meanings made manifest at any particular time. Rather, interpretations should grow commensurate with our understanding of the human condition, the world, and indeed the Cosmos.

“God’s Word” has always been evidenced most abundantly and faithfully on every page of that which is fundamentally Real – the entirety of the natural world. In contrast to such expressions of “natural revelation,” the written scriptures of old have generally been referred to as “special revelation.” What is the relationship between these two modes of divine communication?

From a creatheistic (Evolution Theology) perspective, the two modes are seen as complementary. Perceived conflicts between the scriptures of nature and the written scriptures most likely indicate a problem in interpreting one or the other. And who among us will not find exhilarating the invitation to do reinterpretive work in this time of religious questioning and upheaval? The Bible, taken in a literalistic, human-centered way, can sabotage rather than sustain a person’s walk with God. Scripture – be it the Word made manifest in the material Universe or that which has been revealed through human consciousness – is where we find guidance, solace, and strength. It is also where we are invited, challenged, and supported to be all that we can be, both for the present and for the future.

Scripture is divine communication in any form that supports us in honoring and serving the Whole (the Holy One). For me, scripture is everything that inspires and encourages me to grow in deep integrity. If a poem, chapter in a book, website, or movie helps me grow in Christ-like humility, authenticity, responsibility, and service to others – then for me, it is scripture. Writings and other artifacts that do not support me in this process I do not consider scripture, even if they appear on a page of the Bible.

Finally, for me “worship” has nothing to do with unnatural beliefs or unnatural entities. Worship calls me to a place of deepest awe, gratitude, and love. By grace, I hang out there most of the time.

I’ll be offline the rest of today and will check in on this discussion tomorrow.

Thanks to all of you who have posted your comments. May you each have a great life (and afterlife too, if that’s important to you).

For those interested, the first 50 pages of my book, Thank God for Evolution, can be downloaded as a free PDF HERE. This includes the Table of Contents, Promises, Prologue, Introduction, and Chapter 1.

Is the “Saved By The Blood Of Jesus” post a joke? If not, it sort of creeps me out knowing that a lunatic like that is walking freely among us.Anyway, I’ve been banished to hell before. I figure hell is probably a lot like Detroit, albeit warmer.

And, maybe instead of “pre”-natural (which implies a timeline progression) or “super”-natural (which implies something at an elevated plane from the natural), maybe the right term is “extra”-natural (something outside of our current understanding of the natural order.)

Mitch, as I suspect you know, we don’t have audio recordings of Jesus’ words. Each of the gospel writers, Paul too, regularly reported Jesus’ words in paraphrase, or in a way that suited their purpose, with their own spin added. Of course, Jesus didn’t use the word “integrity”! But as I state above, if you think you can get right with God without living in integrity…good luck!

CClay is correct, Rev. Dowd. My second post was in response to the “Saved by the blood of Jesus” post earlier in the discussion. My point, if not immediately apparent, is fundamentally that we are all atheists of more gods than we affirm. Take the arguments one would use to refute the practices or beliefs of those worshiping Zeus, Baal, Zoroastria, Pan, Dios, Aphrodite, Gaia, or the thousands of other gods mankind has created and apply them to your own deity. We are all agnostics/atheists in that regard. As I believe Richard Dawkins has quipped, I, and these “new atheists,” as many “modern Christians” like to call us, simply believe in at least one less god than all theists. I believe this website sums up what a “new atheist” is quite well: http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=New_atheism.

Rev. Dowd, I have not read your book, which I do plan on doing after today’s discussion. However, I wondered if you would expound upon your comments as I found their application somewhat disturbing.

You wrote:

Scripture is divine communication in any form that supports us in honoring and serving the Whole (the Holy One). For me, scripture is everything that inspires and encourages me to grow in deep integrity. If a poem, chapter in a book, website, or movie helps me grow in Christ-like humility, authenticity, responsibility, and service to others – then for me, it is scripture. Writings and other artifacts that do not support me in this process I do not consider scripture, even if they appear on a page of the Bible.

I fail to see how your church can remain “Christian” with such a belief system. This seems no less revolutionary than what Joseph Smith proposed when he began the Mormon faith. It seems that you suggest an “anything-that-feels-good” or “if-I-feel-it’s-right-it-must-be-so” doctrine which has no firm foundation or absolute truth…at least any absolute truth that is universal. I hate to pigeon hole your thesis but it seems as though you’ve molded together new age spiritualism with a brand of finite skepticism, accepted science, and tossed the parts of Christianity that are increasing becoming harder to sell to an increasingly educated public. But I repeat, I have not read your book or listened to your sermons located on your website. I will respectfully do so and hope that I have misinterpreted your stance, which if I have, I’m sure you will respectfully rebuke me.

“Each of the gospel writers, Paul too, regularly reported Jesus’ words in paraphrase, or in a way that suited their purpose, with their own spin added” So what was the “spin” when Jesus talked about His return and all the pains that went along with it, or about his resurrection?

You have a problem in that you accept those words reported to Jesus that you allow yourself to accept, but you reject those words reported to Jesus that you do not allow yourself to accept. Yet many of those words are tied together one after the other. You have no basis by which to truly say what was and wasn’t said other than what works best to justify yourself.

“I just praise God for a natural faith!”; If there is no supernatural God, then how can there be any God other than what we have created in our own minds? There is no faith, there is only worldliness masquerading as faith. Indeed it is the mark of the beast, it is the number of man.

I am a deep time kind of guy, too, but I am uncomfortable with the claim that some scientific consensus du jour is “reality”. The scientific consensus of 1973 was that an impending ice age would destroy civilization.

…Except that that’s a conservative dittohead fabrication. There actually was no such consensus. Post a link from an informed source, with details, if you’d like to prove me wrong. But this is merely a myth spread by those who will employ any falsehood or misstatement to oppose belief in global warming.

It is very comforting that we Muslims and God have something in common. While we are considered just natural, every day, run of the mill terrorists, God is considered to be the “Supernatural Terrorist”.

While I and other ‘Natural Terrorists’ are wallowing in our likeness of God, congratulations Reverend, for insulting Judaism, Christianity and Islam all with one stroke of pen.

I believe, shahgul, that any link that Rev. Matt (or his guest blogger) has made between Muslims and terrorists is one of your own imagining.

Any rational person knows full well that a “terrorist” can be anyone. They can be any age, from a playground bully to a teenaged school shooter to an adult such as Timothy McVeigh. They can be any religion, any creed, any gender, any nationality. The only defining quality is the intent to use violence, or fear of violence, to terrify and control others.

@Owl_of_bellaire – the “global cooling” anticipated during the 1970s was in fact reported – I remember hearing about it (and reading about it) in science class in high school at the time (long before I became a dittohead) – however, it would seem that the “scientific consensus” around this was in fact a myth, reported by the popular press at the time.

EdT — As happens so often in the news media, just because it’s reported doesn’t mean it’s true. Yes, many news media got hot and excited to run “new ice age” stories — but, as you say, the scientific consensus just wasn’t there. And science is, after all, based on facts and experiments, not popular opinion. On the other hand, the evidence for global warming is much more widespread and widely accepted.

Shahgul, chill. The Irish have only recently gotten off a long run of terrorist activity. The difference between Muslim and Irish terrorists is that the Irish acted out on their own turf and had the good sense to avoid blowing themselves up if they could help it.

It seems that you suggest an “anything-that-feels-good” or “if-I-feel-it’s-right-it-must-be-so” doctrine which has no firm foundation or absolute truth…at least any absolute truth that is universal. I hate to pigeon hole your thesis but it seems as though you’ve molded together new age spiritualism with a brand of finite skepticism, accepted science, and tossed the parts of Christianity that are increasing becoming harder to sell to an increasingly educated public.

I assure you, my book would not have been endorsed by five Nobel laureates and a host of other leading scientists, including renowned atheists, and it most certainly would not have been endorsed by such a wide range of religious luminaries, if it was anything like how you characterize it above.

If you read my book, you’ll find the answer to your questions there, I promise.

As Rev. Matt mentioned at the beginning of this post, my wife Connie Barlow, a noted science writer, and I permanently travel North America sharing an evidential, science-based evolutionary worldview with religious and secular audiences of all ages. The next few days we are driving from Houston to Shreveport, LA, doing a program there, then driving to Tulsa, OK. We’ve got lots speaking events in Tulsa and Oklahoma City over the next week and a half. Thus, this may be the last post I contribute to this discussion.

For those interested, below is a link to what I consider the very best online and print resources in the Epic of Evolution movement.

The dear Reverend is one of very few people who have never called Muslims by that ignoble term.

I was just chilling out, when I wrote that post, maybe I failed to pass on the chuckle I wrote that post with.

It was hilarious to find yourself in such good company. Muslims too, until recently had not discovered the benefits of blowing themselves up. They learned it mostly from Tamil Tiger Hindu activists who have long engaged in this practice in India and Sri Lanka.